"henk de wit" <henk53602@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > I understand the above looks like a complicated mess, but would you > have any pointers of what I could possibly do next to force a better plan? Taking a closer look, it seems the problem is the underestimation of the number of rows resulting from this relation scan: > -> Bitmap Heap Scan on > banners_links (cost=11.43..954.03 rows=2 width=73) (actual > time=0.128..1.069 rows=359 loops=1) > Recheck Cond: (merchant_id = 5631) > Filter: ((status)::text = '0'::text) > -> Bitmap Index Scan on > banners_links_merchant_id_idx (cost=0.00..11.43 rows=424 width=0) (actual > time=0.089..0.089 rows=424 loops=1) > Index Cond: (merchant_id = 5631) You might be able to improve matters by increasing the statistics target for this table. I have a bad feeling though that the problem may be lack of cross-column statistics --- the thing is evidently assuming that only about 1 in 200 rows have status = '0', which might be accurate as a global average but not for this particular merchant. What exactly is the relationship between status and merchant_id, anyway? regards, tom lane
